Massachusetts has sued the federal government, claiming that the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as “a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife,” is unconstitutional under the tenth amendment.

The tenth amendment states that “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

 Since there is nothing in the constitution that grants the feds control over any marriage, gay or straight, the suit argues that the definition should be left up to each individual state.  Specifically, the lawsuit, filed Wednesday July 8th, claims that the defense of marriage act is “overreaching and discriminatory,” and interferes with Massachusetts’ ”sovereign authority to define and regulate marriage.” 

In a legal brief submitted June 11th, the Obama administration strongly supported the Defense of Marriage Act, calling it “appropriate, carefully balanced,” and “justified by reason,” and “not by animus toward gay people.”  It goes on to claim that homosexuals will be granted all the benefits given to heterosexuals, as long as they act like heterosexuals.

Massachusetts is one of only three states where gay marriages are currently legal and being performed.  Their lawsuit is the first of several recent 10th Amendment battles to be fought over a social issue, as opposed to intrastate commerce regulations.  Texas, Montana, and Oklahoma have all passed legislation asserting state’s rights under the 10th amendment as it applies to intrastate gun sales and federal firearm registration, while similar measures are currently under consideration Tennessee, Florida, and Louisiana.  The majority of states have some sort of tenth amendment legislation either already passed into law, or awaiting passage. 

The 10th amendment fight is seen by some as putting Democrats in a tough spot.  Many, including Hillary Clinton, have gone on record claiming that gay marriage is, in fact, a state’s rights issue.  One wonders if she will still voice that opinion, now that she’s Secretary Of State for an administration that’s tried to straddle a pretty big line on the issue.  In addition, if affirmation of a state’s rights regarding gay marriage is indeed linked to 10th amendment firearms and intrastate commerce issues, will Dems who previously made the same claim be willing to stand by their opinions? 

Conversely, will Republicans, who champion the 10th in regards to firearms and commerce, maintain the courage of their convictions now that gay marriage has entered the mix?

Here at The Robalution we hope they will, as the 10th amendment has been marginalized for far too long.  We wish Massachusetts, along with any other state asserting their rights under the 10th, a clear and speedy victory.

- Robert Laurie